Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
R-1591 - 09/13/2016 - PUBLIC WORKS - Resolutions Supporting Documents
ITEM 9.13. Pa� OF oAK0 v p e e p y �F co N.Vv,`�' AGENDA ITEM Regular Board of Trustees Meeting of September 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Professional Service Agreement - Mercury Associates, Inc. z FROM: Doug Patchin, Public Works Director BUDGET SOURCE/BUDGET IMPACT: $52,750 budgeted Garage Fund#341- 77000 RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move the Village Board waive bidding and approve a Professional Services Agreement with Mercury Associates, Inc. to provide Fleet Management Consulting Services. Background/History: During last year's budget process I discussed the need for a Public Works succession plan, one of the areas mentioned was the Garage Fleet Management Division. On December 31, 2015, a village mechanic with 22 years of service retired leaving us with one (1) mechanic in the garage. The following adjustments have been made this year: • A Water Department employee assists our Head Mechanic with maintenance • Local vehicle manufacturer dealerships make repairs • Fire Equipment has been sent to emergency specialty equipment repair shops that employ EVT's (emergency vehicle technicians) • We have contracted with a local municipality to assist with preventive maintenance on Police and Administrative vehicles • Last month we hired a part-time mechanic to conduct preventive maintenance on village vehicles Additionally, we met with a local automotive shop to discuss vehicle oil changes and light to medium duty truck repairs. We met with, companies who offer contracted on-site managed maintenance repair programs, and companies who offer contract mechanics to work in our shop with our staff. Over the last year, staff has determined we need a thorough top to bottom review of our fleet maintenance operation including vehicle management, maintenance, vehicle replacement, and acquisition. Staff contacted local communities that have conducted a Fleet Management �G Consulting Services in the past; Mercury Associates, Inc. came up as one of the leaders in Fleet Management Consulting Services. After a couple of meetings with Mercury we requested a proposal for their services. Qualifications and Experience: Mercury has worked with a wide array of public and private sector organizations around the world, primarily in the United States and Canada and primarily with governmental jurisdictions with fleets ranging in size from fewer than 10 to more than 200,000 vehicles and pieces of equipment. For the US federal government, they have provided services to the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps; 10 of the 15 executive branch departments (Defense, Energy, Homeland Security, Interior, Transportation, State, etc.). Mercury professionals have worked with one or more agencies in 33 states in the US and four provinces and territories in Canada, and with more than 40 colleges and universities. Mercury has also provided private sector consulting services to a diverse mix of large and small companies. Recent corporate/commercial clients include 3M, Air Products, Bell Canada, Brinks, British Columbia Hydro, Carolinas Health Care System, Gulf Stream Marine, Honeywell, Horizon Utilities, Intel, ITS, Inc, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Republic Industries, and many more. Relevant Experience: Of particular relevance to Oak Brook is Mercury's experience working with both large and small local government jurisdictions. Their current and recent (last five years) large local government clients include one or more departments in the cities of Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Edmonton (AB), Fort Worth, Houston, Long Beach, New York, Oakland (CA) and many more. Municipalities: Some of the smaller Municipalities with whom Mercury has worked with around the US and Canada include: Annapolis, MD, Asheville, NC, Buffalo Grove, IL, Corpus Christi, TX, Brownsville, TX, Glenview, IL, Hillsboro, OR, Huntington Beach, CA Lake Bluff, IL, Lake Forest, IL Montgomery, AL, Mount Prospect, IL, Port Moody, BC, Saint John, NB, Springfield, IL, and many more. Mercury Associates, Inc. will conduct this review in three components; 1. Review Fleet Maintenance and Repair Practices a. Initiate and Manage the Project b. Collect and Review Information c. Analyze Data and Benchmark Conditions and Performance d. Evaluate Business Practices and Inventory e. Present Findings and Recommendations 2. Review Other Fleet Management Practices 3. Review Fleet Replacement Practices a. Develop Baseline Fleet Replacement Plan b. Fine-Tune Replacement Plan c. Evaluate Alternative Capital Financing Methods d. Present Findings and Recommendations Mercury will document their findings and recommendations in draft form for review and comment and make revisions, as necessary, based on written feedback received. Mercury will finalize the report and provide the village with a reasonable number of bound copies of the final report. The Village attorney has approved the attached agreement. Recommended Action: The Village Board waives bidding and approves a Professional Services Agreement with Mercury Associates, Inc. RESOLUTION 2016-PW-V-MAINT-AG-R-1591 A RESOLUTION WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK AND MERCURY ASSOCIATES, INC. IN RELATION TO FLEET MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES WHEREAS, Public Works Department Staff has determined that a thorough review of the Village's fleet management operation is needed; and WHEREAS, contacting local communities revealed Mercury Associates, Inc. ("Mercury") as one of the leading firms providing fleet management consulting services ("Consulting Services"); and WHEREAS, Mercury has worked with a wide array of public and private sector organizations around the world, has been in business since 2002, and has submitted a proposal for Consulting Services; and WHEREAS, the Village desires to enter into a Professional Services Agreement ("Agreement") with Mercury to provide Consulting Services, which Agreement is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, Village staff recommends that the Village waive competitive bidding for Consulting Services and enter into the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees, being fully advised in the premises, have determined that it is in the best interests of the Village and its residents to waive competitive bidding for Consulting Services and approve the Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS as follows: Section 1: Recitals. The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated into, and made a part of, this Resolution as the findings of the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Oak Brook. Section 2: Waiver of Competitive Bidding Requirements. The advertising and bidding requirements for Consulting Services shall be, and they are hereby, waived in accordance with Section 1- 7-4 of the Village Code of the Village of Oak Brook, Illinois. Section 3: Approval of Agreement. The President and Board of Trustees hereby approve the Agreement with Mercury in substantially the same form as attached as Exhibit A. Section 4: Authorization and Execution of Agreements. The Village President and Village Clerk shall be, and hereby are, authorized to execute the Agreement between the Village and Mercury after receipt of the final Agreement fully executed by Mercury. Section 5: Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force upon passage and approval in the manner provided by law. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] Resolution 2016-PW-V-MAINT-AG-R-1591 ` Approving Fleet Maintenance Agmt. Page 2 of 3 APPROVED THIS 13th day of September, 2016. Gopal G. Lalmalani Village President PASSED THIS 13th day of September, 2016. Ayes: Nays: Absent: ATTEST: Charlotte K. Pruss Village Clerk Resolution 2016-PW-V-MAINT-AG-R-1591 Approving Fleet Maintenance Agmt. Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A AGREEMENT #32739309 vl SECTION 6. GENERA.E&OVISIONS. other action that may be necessary to ensure that the Services are provided,performed,and completed in accordance with all A. PtcWtiewhin of the Parties. The required governmental permits, licenses, or other approvals Consultant shall act as an independent contractor in providing and authorizations that may be required in connection with and performing the Services. Nothing in nor done pursuant providing,performing, and completing the Services, and with to, this Agreement shall be construed to: (1) create the ail applicable statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations, relationship of principal and agent, employer and employee, including without limitation the Fair Labor Standards Act;any partners, or joint venturers between the Village and statutes regarding qualification to do business, any statutes Consultant; or (2) to create any relationship between the prohibiting discrimination because of,or requiring affirmative Village and any subcontractor of the,Contractor. action based on,race,creed,color,national origin,age,sex,or other prohibited classification, including, without limitation, B. ponfliets of Interest. The Consultant the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ represents and certifies that, to the best of its knowledge: (1) 12101 et seq., and the Illinois Human Rights Act, 775 ILCS no Village employee or agent is interested in the business of 511-101 et seq. Consultant shalt also comply with all the Consultant or this Agreement; (2) as of the date of this conditions of any federal, state, or local grant received by the Agreement, neither the Consultant not any person employed Village or Consultant with respect to this Contract or the or associated with the Consultant has any interest that would Services. Consultant shrill be solely liable for any fines or conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the civil penalties that are imposed by any governmental or quasi- obligations under this Agreement; and (3) neither the governmental agency or body that may arise,or be alleged to Consultant nor any person employed by or associated with the have arisen, out of or in connection with Consultant's,or its Consultant shall at any time during the term of this Agreement subcontractors, performance of, or failure to perform, the obtain or acquire any interest that would conflict in any Services or any part thereof. Every provision of law required manner or degree with the performance of the obligations by law to be inserted into this Contract shall be deemed to be under this Agreement. inserted herein. C. No Collusion. The Consultant represents F. Defau If it should appear at any time that and certifies that the Consultant is not barred from contracting the Consultant has failed or refused to prosecute, or has with a unit of state or local government as a result of(1) a delayed in the prosecution of,the Services with diligence at a delinquency in the payment of any tax administered by the rate that assures completion of the Services in full compliance Illinois Department of Revenue unless the Consultant is with the requirements of this Agreement, or has otherwise contesting, in accordance with the procedures established by failed,refused,or delayed to perform or satisfy the Services or the appropriate revenue act, its liability for the tax or the any other requirement of this Agreement ("Event of amount of the tax,as set f Default"), and fails to cure any such Event of Default within ten business days after the Consultant's receipt of written orth in Section 1142.1-1 et seq. of the Illinois notice of such Event of Default from the Village, then the Municipal Code, 65 ILCS 5/11=42.1-1 et seq. or (2) a Village shall have the right, without prejudice to any other violation of either Section 331 .3 or Section 33E4 of Article remedies provided by law or equity, to (1) terminate this 33E of the Criminal Code of 1961,720 ILCS 5f33E-1 et seq. Agreement without liability for further payment; or (2) if at any time it shall be found that the Consultant has, in withhold from any payment or recover from the Consultant, procuring this Agreement, colluded with any other person, any and all costs, including attorneys' fees and administrative firm,or corporation,then the Consultant shall be liable to the expenses,incurred by the Village as the result of any Event of Village for all Mss or damage that the Village may suffer,and Default by the Consultant or as a result of actions taken by the this Agreement shall,at the Village's option,be null and void. Village in response to any Event of Default by the Consultant. D. Termination. Notwithstanding any other G. Assignment. This Agreement may not be provision hereof,the Village may terminate this Agreement at assigned by the Village or by the Consultant without the prior any time upon 15 days prior written notice to the Consultant. written consent of-the other party. in the event that this Agreement is so terminated, the . N All notices required or fitted to Consultant shall be paid for Services actually performed and otkc req P reimbursable expenses actually incurred, if any, prior to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be termination, not exceeding the value of the Services delivered: (1)personally (2)by a reputable overnight courier; completed. or by (3) by certified mail, return receipt requested, and deposited in the U.S.Mail,postage prepaid. Unless otherwise E. pomn� Hance with Laws and Grants expressly provided in this Agreement,notices shall be deemed Consultant shall give all notices, pay all fees, and take ali received upon the earlier of (a) actual receipt; (b) one 2 business ;day after deposit with an overnight courier as J. Third Party Beneficiary. No claim as a third party evidenced by a receipt of deposit; or(c) three business days beneficiary under this Agreement by any person, firm, or following deposit in the U.S. mail, as evidenced by a return corporation shall be made or be valid against the Village. receipt. Notices and communications to the Village shall be addressed to,and delivered at,the following address: K. Gover_nigg Law: Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by, construed and enforced in accordance with the Village of Oak Brook internal laws,but not the conflicts of laws rules,of the State of 1240 Oak Brook Road Illinois. Venue for any action arising out of this Agreement Oakk,Brook,Illinois 60523 shall be in the Circuit Court for DuPage County,illinois. Attention:Doug Patchin,Public Works Director L. Exhibits and Other„ ttreemeots. If any conflict exists between this Agreement and any exhibit attached hereto or Notices and communications to the Consultant shall be any other Agreement between the parties relating to this addressed to,and delivered at,the following address: transaction,the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. Mercury Associates,Inc. 7361 Calhoun Place,Suite 680 M. . Discbaure of Cagfential Information by the Rockville,MD 20855 !Consultant The Consultant acknowledges that it shall, in Attention: Paul T.Lauria,President performing the Services for the Village under this Agreement, have access, or be directly or indirectly exposed, to 1. Waiver. Neither the Village nor the Confidential Information. The Consultant shall hold Consultant shall be under any obligation to exercise any of the confidential all Confidential Information and shall not disclose rights granted to them in this Agreement except as it shall or use such Confidential Information without the express prior determine to be in its best interest from time to time. The written consent of the Village. The Consultant shall use failure of the Village or the Consultant to exercise at any time reasonable measures at least as strict as those the Consultant any such rights shall not be deemed or construed as a waiver uses to protect its own confidential information. Such of that right,nor shall the failure void or affect the Village's or measures shall include, without limitation, requiring the Consultant's right to enforce such rights or any other employees and subcontractors of the Consultant to execute a rights. non-disclosure agreement before obtaining access to Confidential Information. ATTEST: VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK By: By: Charlotte Pruss,Village Clerk Riccardo F.Ginex,Village Manager ATTEST MERCURY ASSOCIATES,INC. By: By: Title: Its- 3 Proposal to Provide Fleet Manage ent Consulti' ng Services to the May 2016 MERCURY ASSOCIATES, INC. f May 25, 2016 Mr. Doug Patchin Public Works Director Village of Oak Brook 3003 Jorie Boulevard Oak Brook, IL 60523 Dear Mr. Patchin: Pursuant to our recent discussions, Mercury Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal to provide fleet management consulting services to the Village of Oak Brook Public Works Department (PWD). The goal of these services is to assist PWD in preparing itself and the Village to meet the growing challenges of managing its vehicle and equipment fleet. These challenges stem from a number of forces that are bearing down on both large and small, public-sector and private-sector fleet owners: the loss of institutional knowledge resulting from the retirement of experienced maintenance technicians, supervisors, and fleet managers; the growing technological complexity of fleet assets due to the adoption of electric, plug-in hybrid electric, and alternative fuel vehicles and increasing regulation of vehicle fuel economy and emissions; and the impacts of the "Big Data" phenomenon, ranging from the growing use of tetematics for real-time vehicle tracking and event monitoring to the rising expectations of senior decision makers and elected officials with respect to the use of data-driven fleet management processes. Many small municipalities are struggling to deal with these challenges because they have limited in-house personnel resources to devote to fleet management. As a result, more and more jurisdictions are retying on third parties to assist them in performing critical fleet management functions, including vehicle dealerships and independent repair shops; contractors who specialize in fleet maintenance and/or parts management; and other government jurisdictions. PWD has already explored and/or begun to employ all of these strategies, albeit in a largely reactive and piecemeal fashion. It is looking to this study to assist it in developing a clear understanding of what strategy or combination of prioritized strategies will best serve the Village, based on an independent and objective assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of its current fleet management resources and business practices. Countless small local government jurisdictions across the US and Canada have turned to Mercury for guidance in improving their fleet management practices. Mercury's current and recent clients of this type range from Yellowknife, Northwest Territories and Guelph, Ontario to Gresham, OR; Encinitas, CA; Mount Prospect, tL; Brownsville, TX and Sarasota,FL. We are excited about the possibility of adding Oak Brook to this list of satisfied clients. Mercury Associates, Inc. www.mercury-assoc.com 7361 Calhoun Place,Suite 680•Rockville, MD 20855 . 301 519 0535- Mr. Doug Patchin: Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services May 25, 2018 Page 2 will serve as the point of contact for all matters relating to this proposal, and am authorized to legally bind our company to the commitments made in it. I can be reached in our Rockville, MD office at 310 519 0535, ext. 1021 or at plauria @mercury- assoc.com. We appreciate being given the opportunity to offer our services to the Village and look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, P"Tcam'-.4 Paul T. Lauria President Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services TABLE OF CONTENTS Our Understanding of the Situation............................................................ .... ........... ...............1 ProposedWork Plan .................................................................................. .................. ...............2 1. Review Fleet Maintenance and Repair Practices ................................. ............... ..2 Task 1.1: Initiate and Manage the Project........................................... ....................3 Task 1.2: Collect and Review Information........................ .................. ....................4 Task 1.3: Analyze Data and Benchmark Conditions and Performance....................5 Task 1.4: Evaluate Business Practices............................ .................. ....................5 Task 1.5: Present Findings and Recommendations............................ ....................7 2. Review Other Fleet Management Practices (optional)..... ........ .......... ...................8 3. Review Fleet Replacement Practices (optional)......... ....................... ....................9 Task 3.1; Develop Baseline Fleet Replacement Plan ......................... .....................9 Task 3.2: Fine-Tune Replacement Pl an........................... .................. .................. 11 Task 3.3: Evaluate Alternative Capital Financing Methods................. .................. 12 -Task 3.4: Present Findings and Recommendations... ............................... .......... 15 ProjectSchedule...................................................................................... .................15 Qualifications and Experience........... ................................................ ......... ................ .............16 Overview........................................ ........................................................ ..................16 RelevantExperience......................................... ..................................... .................. 17 Project Team.............. .................. .............. .... ................................... ..................18 CostProposal..................................... . ............................... .............. .............................20 Appendix Detailed Cost Proposal Project Timeline and Milestones I a IN 111 WWI Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION The Village of Oak Brook operates a fleet of 83 vehicles, including passenger sedans, pickup trucks, pope patrol vehicles, ambulances, fire trucks, plow trucks, and miscellaneous pieces of construction equipment. The fleet is managed by the Public Works Department, including a Vehicle Fleet Division, which operates a small shop on Jorie`Boulevard staffed by two maintenance technicians and a half-time mechanic helper; one of the two mechanics recently retired and has yet to be replaced. The capital and operating costs of the fleet are financed using a cost charge-back system and accounted for in two separate internal service funds, the Garage Fund and the Equipment Replacement Fund. Budgeted expenditures for these funds for FY 2016 are $805,000 and $746,000 respectively. The Department outsources police patrol vehicle maintenance and repair to the Village of Woodridge and fire apparatus maintenance and repair to a commercial repair shop that employs certified emergency vehicle technicians. PWD has explored the possibility of hiring a contractor to provide on-site fleet maintenance and repair services, but concluded that such a contract is probably not cost effective based on the fee estimates or proposals it received. As in many small jurisdictions, some fleet management activities are performed by employees who have responsibilities that extend well beyond the realm of fleet management. For example, the Public Works Director oversees maintenance and repair parts purchases and the generation of charges to fleet user agencies. The Public Works Superintendent oversees maintenance and repair operations. The recent retirement of the garage mechanic, the potential retirement of the Public Works Director next year, the relative lack of experience managing the Village's fleet of the Public Works Superintendent, and the combination of industry trends, alluded to above,that are confronting all fleet owners makes this an opportune time for the Village to take,a fresh look at the way it manages its fleet. In order to do this, Mercury proposes to perform what we call a best management practices review, essentially a top-to- bottom assessment of current fleet management practices aimed at identifying both business process improvement and cost savings opportunities. The main component of our proposed scope of services is an assessment of PWD's fleet maintenance and repair practices. Two optional tasks included in this proposal are 1) the enlargement of the best practices review to encompass all other fleet management activities, ranging from vehicle allocation, acquisition, utilization management, and fueling to fleet cost management; and 2) an evaluation of fleet replacement planning and financing practices, including the use of attemative capital financing methods such as leasing and lease-purchasing :and the determination of replacement rates to be used to replenish the Equipment Replacement Fund. Our proposed approach to conducting each of these scope elements is detailed in the following sections of our proposal. ,J� tJ J L - w..: Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services PROPOSED WORK PLAN 1. REVIEW FLEET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR PRACTICES The goat of this project component is to identify how the Public Works Department should organize and conduct fleet maintenance and repair activities in light of both conditions and challenges that are specific to the Village of Oak Brook and general industry trends and fleet maintenance best practices. In order to formulate and prioritize recommendations for improvement, we first need to determine the state of current fleet maintenance resources and practices. To make this determination, we will utilize information collection and analysis techniques that fall into two categories: quantitative performance measurement and benchmarking, and business process mapping and gap analysis. Having conducted consulting projects for more than 600 organizations, our consultants understand both the importance of, and the best techniques for, collecting information efficiently and with minimal disruption to day-to-day work activities. The primary techniques we use in a best management practices assessment like this one to collect information on, and evaluate strengths and weaknesses in, current business practices are the following. Written Information Request. We begin by providing detailed requests specifying the types of documentary material (e.g., organization charts, position descriptions, policy and procedure statements, etc.) and quantitative data (e.g., work order and fuel transaction data, meter readings, etc.) we would like to review. These requests will serve not only as a guide for PWD to follow in assembling information for our review, enabling our staff to "hit the ground running" once we come on site, but actually constitute the start of the evaluation process itself. This Is because the availability or lack thereof of key information on the fleet and fleet management business processes provides us with initial insights into the soundness of those processes. For instance, the existence of formally documented standard operating procedures indicates that an organization has been proactive in defining how key fleet management activities are to be performed, while the lack of such SOPS may indicate a lack of sufficient structure, clarity, and accountability in some areas of fleet management—with a corresponding impact on fleet management effectiveness and fleet performance and costs. Interviews and Focus Group Sessions. Face-to-face 'interviews and focus group discussions are staples of this type of assessment. We typically interview a'selection of ` officials and employees involved in both the management and the operation/utilization of the fleet in order to gain insights into current perceptions of and levels of satisfaction with both the provision and consumption of met resources and services. We also sometimes need to interview officials in organizational units whose activities affect fleet management practices only indirectly, such as those involved in budgeting and financial management, procurement, and Information technology administration and support. Ilf .R' X= Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services Performance Measurement and Benchmarking. Data availability permitting, we employ quantitative performance measurement techniques in every business practices assessment we conduct, interpreting the resulting performance statistics using suitable internal and industry (if available and relevant) benchmarks. In addition to serving as a valuable diagnostic tool that helps us home in on potential problem areas and avoid devoting unnecessary time and attention to areas in which current practices are strong, performance measurement adds objectivity and consistency to our evaluation, and hence, credibility to our findings and conclusions. Business Process Mapping and Gap Analysis. The other key method we use to evaluate fleet management practices and identify opportunities to improve quality and lower costs is process mapping and gap analysis.This Involves ascertaining 1) If and how specific management and operating processes are formally defined; 2) the soundness of their design — e.g., their logic, thoroughness, compliance with applicable regulations, responsibility and authority for execution, and so forth 3) their consistency with industry best practices; and 4) the nature of their actual execution, which is a function of how they are communicated (e.g., through a policy and procedure manual) and how employees are held accountable for following them. We gain these insights primarily from the review of documentary material such as policy and procedure statements and the conduct of the aforementioned interviews and focus group sessions. Our approach to conducting the assessment will be inclusive, interactive, and results oriented. Our ultimate goal as management consultants is for our clients to improve these practices by taking action on our recommendations. This requires that the recommendations be practical and appropriate to the challenges and opportunities facing a specific organization at a sPecifc point in time. it also requires that stakeholders not only understand the analytical methods, findings, and conclusions on which such recommendations are based, but actually take ownership of proposed organizational, business process, and other changes. This requires, in turn, that we continuously interact with and secure the cooperation and confidence of an array of stakeholders in both the fleet management and other organizational units.. Task 1.1: Initiate and Manage the Project We will start the project with a formal kick-off meeting whose primary objectives will be to introduce Mercury Associates' consultants to PWD officials and employees and to confirm both parties' understanding of key study parameters including but not necessarily limited to project goals and objectives, scope, timeline, critical success factors, and deliverables. A key ingredient of an effective project management approach is periodic written progress reports. We want to ensure that the Village Is afforded regular opportunities to discuss the status of the project with us and to raise any questions or concerns relating to our progress toward achieving its expected outcomes. To this end, we will submit a brief progress report on a monthly basis, recapping the work accomplished to date. The written progress reports will be integrated with our monthly invoices. We also can WE - Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services conduct periodic conference calls, if desired, with appropriate Village officials to discuss such things as obstacles to study progress or desired outcomes encountered, and preliminary findings and recommendations being considered. Task 1.2: Collect and Review Information Prior to kicking off the assessment, we will provide PWD with two written information requests. The first of these will be an MS Word-based checklist which identifies the documentary material that we would like to obtain to conduct the assessment. The checklist will be organized by functional area of fleet management to be reviewed, as outlined in Task 1.4 below. We will request that PWD return a completed checklist with available documentary materials.This way, we will have a clear record of what types of information were-or were not—available for our use in conducting the study. Examples of the materials we will request include: • Position descriptions; • Policy and procedure statements; • Commonly used recordkeeping forms and management reports; • Previously prepared consulting and/or audit reports; and • Sample bid/proposal solicitation specifications, contracts and purchase order, and vendor invoices. Our second information request will be in the form of an MS Excel spreadsheet that specifies certain pieces of information we would like to obtain for each asset in the Village fleet for a recent 12-month period. Examples of the quantitative data we will request for each asset include year, make, model, serial number (VIN), Village ID number, class code and description, user agency name, in-service date, original purchase price/capitalized cost (for any leased assets), life-to-date maintenance and repair cost, recent current meter reading and meter reading date, utilization during the 12-month period, maintenance and repair costs during the same period (broken out by in-house labor hours and costs, in-house parts costs, and outside vendor charges), and gallons of fuel consumed during the same period. Please note that our proposed level of effort for this task assumes that the Department will be able to furnish these data to us in either Excel or flat files capable of being imported to Excel in the format specified in the abovementioned-data collection template. It also assumes that these data will be substantially accurate and complete, requiring minimal data cleansing or normalization by our project team. Our IT consultants can assist PWD in writing queries, extracting data, and cleansing data prior to analysis, if necessary, for an additional fee. We will review all of the material and data provided in order to develop a preliminary understanding of strengths and weaknesses in current fleet management practices, lot� 1 K11101 4 mss..r Proposal to Provide C fleet Management Consulting Services as well as in mapping and evaluating fleet management policies, procedures, and practices in a later task. Task 1.3: Analyze Data and Benchmark Conditions and Performance We will use the quantitative data collected in the previous task to begin the process of analyzing current frfecycle cost management practices in the Village. Analysis results will help us flag speck fleet management activities in which opportunities for direct or indirect cost reduction appear to exist, which we can then scrutinize during the process mapping and evaluation task of this study component. Subject to the availability of accurate and detailed data, we will calculate statistics for current fleet maintenance and repair activities and the fleet for selected key performance indicators — quantitative measures of efficiency and effectiveness. We will interpret these statistics by comparing them against established industry standards, benchmarks, and/or peer survey results, where available. We will incorporate the results of our data analyses in the development of findings and recommendations in specific areas of fleet management practice in the next task. Task 1.4: Evaluate Business Practices We will review current business practices in those areas of fleet management that most directly affect fleet lifecycle costs. The results of this evaluation will serve as the foundation for recommending specific strategies and business process improvements the Department should pursue in order to manage the Village's fleet efficiently and effectively. As discussed above, we will evaluate current practices using standard business process mapping and gap analysis techniques aimed at first defining and then identifying strengths and weaknesses in specific functional areas. We will determine how processes currently are performed through a combination of documentation review, employee interviews, focus group meetings, and site visits. in doing this, we fully understand that the way Village employees are supposed to perform certain activities and the way they actually do so are not necessarily same. Thus, we will assess the adequacy of both the definition, as expressed in regulations, rules, policies, procedures, forms, etc. and the execution of fleet management processes in accordance with these requirements and guidelines. We will determine how wel/business processes are defined and executed by assessing: 1. Their intrinsic soundness (e.g., the clarity and logic with which they are documented, the way they are communicated to employees, and the manner in which they are enforced); 2. Their consistency with industry best practices which we have observed, and in many cases defined, through our project team's combined decades of professional fleet management, consulting, public speaking, writing, and training s' v y, Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services experience; and 3. Their results, as reflected in the quantitative measurement of costs and performance levels in the previous task, and in the satisfaction levels of management officials, fleet management employees, and fleet users. In evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of current fleet maintenance practices, our ultimate objective will be to advise the Department as to how these practices can be improved. Consequently, our evaluation approach will not seek to merely differentiate good practices from bad, but to identify the factors unique to the Village of Oak Brook whether political, organizational, managerial, operational, administrative, fiscal, technological, educational, or other - that explain why some practices are strong and others weak. This will allow us to develop recommendations for improvement that are not generic or academic in nature, but of direct applicability to the needs, objectives, conditions, and capabilities of the Village and the Department. The business practices we will evaluate in this task are the following. In-House Asset Maintenance and Repair 1. Pre-/past-trip inspection and defect reporting 2. Preventive maintenance program design and execution 3. Work planning,scheduling, assignment, and execution 4. Technician supervision`and performance management 5. Warranty management In-House Maintenance and Repair Parts Management 6. Supplier selection, contract establishment, and performance management 7. Inventory and ad hoc parts procurement 8. Parts requisitioning and disbursement 9. Inventory management and control Outsourced Maintenance and Repair Management 10.Insourcing versus outsourcing determination 11 Service provider(e.g., vendor) selection, contract establishment, and performance management 12.Service requisition and authorization and transaction administration _Fleet Maintenance Resources Management 13.Organization structure and staffing levels 14.Employee training and professional development Allows am s Proposal to Provide j Fleet Management Consulting Services 15.Maintenance facility utilization management, housekeeping, and maintenance Fleet Maintenance Information Management 16.Fleet management information System functionality, configuration, and use 17.Integration and use of third-party service provider information 18.Standard and ad hoc management analysis and reporting Fleet Maintenance Cost Management 19.Cost charge-back rate development 20.Charge-back system and Garage Fund management 21 Cost and expenditure analysis and control Fleet Maintenance Service Delivery Management 22.Transaction-based communication 23.Operator{custcmter satisfaction measurement 24.Customer relationship management Task 1.5: Present Findings and Recommendations We will document our findings and recommendations in a written report. This document Will recap how we conducted the management practices assessment, what we found in terms of strengths and weaknesses of current fleet management conditions and practices (this section will be organized by functional area based on the content of the above checklist), and what we recommend the Village do to improve fleet maintenance practices and position DPW to deal with impending retirements and other strategic challenges. Recommended improvements are likely to include a combination of tactical and strategic initiatives pertaining to both internal business processes, staff, and other resources and the use of external service providers. We will submit this report in draft form for review and comment and make revisions,`-as necessary, based on written feedback received. We will provide PWD with a reasonable number of bound copies of the final report (if desired), along with one camera-ready copy 'in electronic form. In addition to documenting study results in a written report, we will conduct one informal presentation of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations to PWD, fleet user organization, and/or other appropriate Village officials. We will develop an MS PowerPoint presentation for this purpose. At the Village's option, we also can conduct a formal presentation of this and other project'component results to the Village Board for a small additional fee. MY IN 1111 Proposal to Provide �n Fleet Management Consulting Services 2. REVIEW OTHER FLEET MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (OPTIONAL) In this optional project component, we would expand the scope of the above best management practices assessment to encompass all other fleet management practices, using the same information gathering and analysis methods as those described above. We would integrate our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in the report and presentation prepared in Component 1. The specific practices we would review are the following. Asset Allocation and Utilization Management 1. Asset requirements definition' 2. Acquisition alternatives analysis (e.g., rent v. own) and decision making 3. Asset utilization measurement and exception management 4. Personal use management 5. Personally owned vehicle use management Asset Acquisition and Disposal 6. Purchase specifications development, bid solicitation, and asset/supplier selection 7. Purchase/lease/rental contract establishment and management 8. Asset commissioning 9. Asset decommissioning and remarketing/disposal Driver/Operator Management 10.Operator license management (MVR checks, substance abuse testing, etc.) 11 Operator training and discipline 12.Safety management 13.Accident management Fleet Fueling 14.Supplier selection and contract establishment 15.Bulk fuel procurement 16.Bulk fuel inventory management and control In this area, our review will include exploring the potential impacts on future fleet size of any general trends that may exist in the Village toward greater outsourcing of services that depend heavily on the use of fleet assets,such as street sweeping. ,, 111031111RU t� z, - =N.r Proposal to Provide 1 Meet Management Consulting Services 17.Fueling facility operation and maintenance 18.Commercial fuel transaction/credit card program management Fleet Replacement 19.Replacement cycle guidelines 20.Replacement planning 21.Equipment Replacement Fund rate development and management 22.Use of alternative capital financing methods 3. CONDUCT FLEET REPLACEMENT PRACTICES REVIEW (OPTIONAL) One of the best ways for the Village of Oak Brook to mitigate many of the most serious fleet repair challenges with which many small fleet owners struggle is to replace vehicles before they require major repairs. Essentially, this involves trading higher fleet capital costs for tower operating costs. Effectively managing capital costs, in turn, requires a proactive replacement management program and the use of one or more capital financing methods that ensure that funds are made available to acquire replacement vehicles when intended - rather than when "cash flow" permits. At present, the Village has a relatively young fleet, having slowly recovered from the curtailment in fleet replacement spending that resulted from the 2009 financial crisis. Also, to its credit, the Village employs a replacement reserve fund that allows it to accumulate funds incrementally to defray the costs of replacing vehicles and equipment. This is an industry best practice insofar as replacement rates are calculated properly and the reserve fund balance is managed properly. We note that a large amount of money is being transferred this year from the Equipment Replacement Fund to the Village General Fund to shore up funds for employee pension obligations. While there is nothing necessarily in appropriate about making such a transfer, it does beg the question of whether the Village has accumulated more replacement reserves than necessary to ensure the timely replacement of fleet assets in the future. This is one of several questions we would answer in this optional study component. Task 31: Develop Baseline Fleet Replacement Plan Our approach to evaluating replacement practices begins with the development of a long-term fleet replacement plan that quantifies the future replacement costs of each and every asset currently in the Village's fleet. We will develop this plan using a proprietary software program called CARCAPTm (Capital Asset Replacement Cost Analysis Program"rm) designed specifically to conduct this type of analysis. Z We would perform a limited review of Village practices in this area only to the extent that PWD elects to not have us perform optional Component 3,which is a full review of fleet replacement practices. 11 1aCl a Jim E 9 Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services To develop them plan, we will begin by obtaining an inventory of vehicles and pieces of equipment in the fleet. We will work with appropriate officials to ensure that all required data elements are obtained, including asset ID number; VIN; user organization name; asset model year, make, and model;asset class code and description; in-service date; recent meter reading; etc. We request that this information be provided in a Microsoft Excel file, and will furnish the Village with an Excel-based data template to facilitate this. We will then develop a list of vehicle and equipment class codes for the fleet that will be used as the basis for populating the Planning Parameter Table in CARCAP, and work with PWD officials to identify (if, necessary to define) the parameters (i.e., assumptions) needed for the program to develop a replacement plan and other associated cost and capital financing analysis results. These parameters include, by asset class, recommended replacement cycles in age (months) and usage (miles or engine hours), purchase price in today's dollars, purchase price inflation rate, interest rates and terms for alternative financing approaches, and disposition of vehicle remarketing proceeds. We will discuss current replacement cycle guidelines or policies used by the Village and recommend changes where appropriate based on our experience working with other small municipal fleets in the US. (We can perform optimal replacement cycle analyses for selected key types of assets in the fleet for an additional fee if this is of interest to the Department or any of its customers, such as the Police or Fire departments.) , Next, we will use these two sets of inputs to develop a preliminary or baseline replacement plan that projects the replacement date and cost of each unit in the fleet each time it meets the recommended criteria for replacement over the next 20 years. A baseline replacement plan for the 315-unit fleet of a local government jurisdiction with whom we worked recently is shown in the following exhibit. Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services Sample Baseline Replacement Plan (316-Unit Local Government Fleet) ©floss RMACEMElff COSTS $4 $2 $I so Task 3.2 Fine Tune Replacement Plan As the above exhibit suggests, we often find peaks and valleys in future spending requirements when we develop a baseline fleet replacement plan for a cent. Even in the most homogeneous of fleets, the confluence of replacement dates of vehicles with different rates of utilization and replacement costs rarely results in an equal number of vehicles becoming eligible for replacement each year. Needless to say, in a mixed- application municipal fleet comprised of everything from passenger cars to vactors to fire trucks, such convergences typically result in significant fluctuations in annual, replacement costs. Moreover, large backlogs;of replacement needs, signified by the large projected fleet replacement cost in the first year of the plan shown above, are a characteristic of virtually all fleet operations that traditionally have relied on direct cash financing of fleet replacement purchases. In this task, we will review the baseline plan we develop for the Village's fleet with appropriate officials and make needed adjustments to the timing of the replacement of individual vehicles or pieces of equipment to reduce to a manageable level the backlog of replacement spending needs that we suspect currently exists. CARCAP has functionality for doing this, including a replacement prioritization scoring system and a replacement plan "smoothing„ feature that allows the user to systematically adjust planned replacement dates for individual assets in the fleet to accommodate near and long-term budget realities. A smoothed version of the baseline replacement plan shown above can be seen in the following exhibit. k 11 '4 ✓-:r Proposal to Provide J ~ Meet Management Consulting Services Sample Smoothed Replacement Plan (315-Unit Local Government Fleet) oaoss REPLACEMEWCOWS as N 03 i2 l9.orYW Task 3.3: Evaluate Alternative Capital Financing Methods Once we have finalized the replacement plan, we will use this smoothed replacement plan as the foundation for evaluating altemative capital financing approaches. Our replacement planning program CARCAP is designed to calculate funding requirements, by vehicle and by year for each year of a 20-year analysis period, under each of several financing approaches: outright purchase using ad hoc appropriations of cash; a replacement reserve fund and charge-back system (the V'illage's current approach); debt financing; and leasing. We will quantify and compare against one another the long-term funding requirements under each financing approach that is of interest to the Village and identify the financing approach that we believe would be most beneficial from both a budgetary (i.e. cash , flow) perspective and an economic (i.e., present value cost) perspective. The following exhibits illustrate the future fiscal impacts of the use of several alternative capital financing methods to pay for the replacement costs shown in the smoothed replacement illustrated in Task 3.2 above. "If In IPAIJ 12 .s=. Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services Net Fleet Replacement Funding Requirements, Cash Purchase Financing Net Asset Purchase Costs aas sza sis 0 sos m.o fiscal Year Net Replacement Funding Requirements, Reserve Fund Financing Reserve Fund FMancMg sss P— SIA sos w.o F SCO Yau M NwwaWe . �afw144awwnlCwls PWARW RE" a 6w�IMwon UY In MW 13 Proposal to Provide r~ Fleet Management Consulting Services Net Replacement Funding Requirements, Debt Financing Gross Replacement Costs, Net Debt Service Costs us _ :13 3as 3oa rw"I Year �MOOall�uoanorowts +lWll Mttlfli.taMY�lI�I UJa MIaCaMt Side-by-Side Comparison of Net Replacement Funding Requirements Net Replacement Funding Requirements Outright Cash Purchase v.Reserve Fund v.Debt Financing $2.5 32.0 313 CpM C 30.5. $0.0 �Oy7MMTgt•Ifl/IdKa: ®AttlR1lpow A tabular comparison of the fiscal impacts over the next 20 years of each of the three capital financing approaches illustrated above is shown in the table below. Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services Future Fleet Replacement Funding Requirements Outright Purchase v. Debt v. Reserve fund (millions) Cash Purchase $ 1.211 $ 1.211 $ 1.221 $ 1.191 $ 0.981 $ 0.941 $ 0.561 $ 1.001$ 1.05 $ 1.23 $10.59 Debt Lease Purchase $ 0.10 1 $ 0.24 1 $ 0.45 1 $ 0.66 1 $ 0.81 1 $ 1.00 1 $ 1.13`1 $ 1.18 $ 1.09 $ 1.12 $ 7.79 Reserve Fund` $ 1.57 1 $ 1.14 $ 1.20 S 1.24 1 $ 0-821$_0.92 1 $ 0.94 1 $'0.97 $1:02 1 $ 1.05 $10.89 Cash Purchase 1 1.121 $0.641 $1.151 $1.031 $1.451 $1,76 $1.9A $1.331 $0.941 $0.72 $11.75 Debt Lease Ptirchasel $1.1 $1.331 $1.341 $1.271 $1.371 $1. $1. $1.481 $1.E2 $1.591 .$13.71 Reserve Fund 1 $1.071 $1.081 $1.001 $1,141 $1.2 _$1.251 $1.741 $1.491 $1.261 $1.27 512.59 Task 3.4: Present Findings and Recommendations We will document our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a written report. This document will recap how we conducted the fleet replacement study, what we found in terms of replacement cycle guideline, funding, and financing improvement opportunities, and what we recommend the Village do to improve these practices. As in the two previous project components, we will submit this report in draft form for review and comment and make revisions, as necessary, based on written feedback received. We will provide the Village with a reasonable number of bound copies of the final report (if desired), along with one camera-ready copy in electronic form. In addition to documenting study results in this report, we will conduct one informal presentation of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations to PWD, fleet user organization, and other appropriate Village, officials. We will develop a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation(s) for this purpose. At the Village's option, we also can conduct a formal presentation of this and other project component results to the Village Board for a small additional fee. Finally, we will provide all detailed analytical results from this project component to PWD in an MS Excel workbook. PROJECT SCHEDULE We estimate that all three components of the project will take approximately 16 weeks to complete if they are all performed in conjunction with one another. Please note that our proposed terrieline begins with the project kick-off meeting, which may or may not be the same date as the execution of a contract or issuance of a formal notice to proceed. Adherence to this timeline is contingent upon the activities not only of the Mercury project team but of the Village as well, including the timely delivery of requested data �i�� a Rol WE 1s Proposal to Provide y~X Fleet Management Consulting Services and documentary material; scheduling of site visits, interviews, and presentations; completion of the Web-based survey of users of potentially underutilized fleet assets; and receipt of written feedback on draft final reports. A Gantt chart for the project can be found in the appendix to this proposal QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OVERVIEW Mercury Associates, Inc. is a Maryland corporation, incorporated in 2002, with offices located in Rockville, MD (headquarters); Charlotte, NC; and Houston, TX. We are an employee-owned fleet management consulting firm that assists organizations in improving the management and operation of their vehicle and equipment fleets. Collectively, the firm's three owners possess more than 75 years of professional fleet management and fleet management consulting experience. Mercury's staff consists of approximately 30 full and part-time employees (including the owners), many of whom were professional fleet managers, full-time fleet management consultants, or both, prior to joining the firm. Mercury's consulting services touch on virtually every facet of fleet management and operation, ranging from broad-based assessments of fleet management organizational structures, staffing levels, facilities and equipment, and business practices, to tightly focused analyses of a single issue or opportunity such as "Can we reduce the size of our fleet?" "Should we replace our fleet management information system?" "How can we reduce our maintenance and repair expenditures?" or "Should we lease or buy vehicles?" We also provide many different types of implementation and management support services to fleet owners such as information system requirements definition, selection, and implementation; development of RFPs for vehicles and equipment, maintenance and repair parts, fuel, and third-party services ranging from fuel management to parts management to fleet maintenance and repair; business process redesign; cost charge-back rate development; policy and procedure development; management training; and executive recruiting. Mercury's principals and employees have worked with a wide array of public and private-sector organizations around the world — primarily in the United States and Canada and primarily with governmental jurisdictions— with fleets ranging in size from fewer than 10 to more than 200,000 vehicles and pieces of equipment. For the US federal government, we have provided services to the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps; 10 of the 15 executive branch departments (Defense, Energy, Homeland Security, Interior, Transportation, State, etc.); and the General Services Administration, NASA, the US Postal Service, and the Smithsonian Institution. Our professionals have worked with one or more agencies in 33 states in the US and four provinces and territories in Canada, and with more than 40 colleges and universities. ►r �e ,bw Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services In the private sector, Mercury has provided consulting services to a diverse mix of large and small companies. Recent corporate/commercial clients include 3M, Air Products, Bell Canada, Brinks, British Columbia Hydro, Carolinas HealthCare System, Cox Enterprises, Cudd Energy Services, EPCOR, Gulf Stream Marine, Honeywell, Horizon Utilities, Intel, ITS, Inc., Joerns-Recover Care, Johnson & Johnson, Lancaster Foods, Pfizer, Republic Industries, Quanta Services, and Schindler Elevator. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Of particular relevance to Oak Brook is Mercury Associates' experience working with bath large and small local government jurisdictions. Our current and recent past (last five years) large local government clients include one or more departments in the cities of Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Edmonton (AB), Fort Worth, Houston, Long Beach, New York, Oakland (CA), Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Richmond (VA), Sacramento, Saint Louis, Salt Lake, San Antonio, San Francisco, Seattle, Tampa, Toronto, Vancouver (BC), and Washington, DC; and the counties of Ada (Boise), ID Bexar (San Antonio), TX Chesterfield (Richmond), VA; Gwinnett (Atlanta), GA; Harris (Houston), TX; Hillsborough (Tampa), FL; Howard, MD; Jefferson (Birmingham), AL Jefferson (New Orleans), LA; Loudoun, VA Mecklenburg (Charlotte), NC; Miami-Dade, FL; Montgomery, MD; Orange, CA; Orange (Orlando), FL; Pinellas (St. Petersburg), FL; Sacramento, CA; San Bernardino, CA; and Wake (Raleigh), NC. Some of the smaller municipalities with whom we have worked around the US and Canada in recent years include: • Annapolis, MD • Longmeadow, MA • Asheville, NC • Medicine Hat, AB • Brownsville, TX • Montgomery, AL • Corpus Christi, TX 0 Mount Prospect, IL • Encinitas, CA • Mountain Brook, AL • Exeter, NH • Olympia, WA • Fayetteville, NC 0 Palo Alto, CA • Guelph, ON • Port Moody, BC • Greenville, SC • Pullman,WA • Harrisonburg, VA Provo, UT • Hillsboro, OR Saint John, NB • Hamilton, NJ Tacoma,WA • Huntington Beach, CA Waterford, CT • Hyattsville, MD Wilmington, DE WAWA eg.*: . r Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services Our work with these and many other government jurisdictions both large and small has given us a deep understanding of the challenges of managing and operating a fleet in a local;government jurisdiction like Oak Brook. This expertise is further enhanced by the professional fleet management experience of our staff: no fewer than seven of our employees, including two of Mercury's three owners, are former local government fleet management professionals (in Charlotte, NC; Jefferson County, CO Kansas City- Wyandotte County, KS; Los Angeles County, CA; Montgomery County, MD; Pinellas County, FL; Saint Petersburg, FL; Sandy, UT; Sarasota County, FL; and Vail, CO). PROJECT TEAM The project team that we propose for conducting this study is shown in the table below. Brief biographical sketches of each team member follow, and detailed resumes can be furnished upon request. As can be seen, our team is composed of individuals with extensive experience as fleet managers, fleet management consultants, or both. The expected level of effort by project team member is shown in our detailed cost proposal, which has been provided under separate cover. Team Member Title Project Roles Project director with overall responsibility for contract negotiation and execution; project Paul Lauria President planning and administration; direct involvement in all three project components; participation in all key meetings/presentations; and quality assurance review of all deliverables. Tony Yankovich Senior Manager Project manager with day-today responsibility for managing and conducting all project components. Steve Saltzgiver Manager Support analyst on project Components 1 and 2. David Burtnick Senior Consultant Lead analyst on project Component 3. Paul Lauria is the president of Mercury Associates. During his consulting career of more than 30 years, he has worked with a wide array of organizations in the public and private sectors touching on virtually every facet of fleet management and operation. He has conducted presentations and workshops on fleet management best practices throughout the United States and in 18 other countries around the world; directed research studies for entities such as the NAFA Foundation, the RAND Corporation, and the Transportation Research Board; and served as an expert witness on more than half a dozen class-action lawsuits and arbitrations in federal and state courts. Prior to co-founding Mercury Associates, he was Vice President and Director of Fleet Management Consulting Services for Maximus, Inc.; a Senior Manager in the National Transportation Consulting Group of Ernst & Young; and an analyst with the North Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services Carolina Department of Transportation and Durham (NC) Transit. Mr. Lauria's particular areas of expertise include business process mapping, evaluation, and reengineering; strategic business planning; fleet rightsizing and optimization; activity-based costing and cost charge;-back system design; vehicle life cycle cost determination and replacement cycle optimization; and fleet replacement planning and evaluation of alternative capital financing approaches. Mr. Lauria has worked extensively with clients in California including the cities of Long Beach, Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego, and San Francisco; the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, and San Luis Obispo; and Pacific Gas & Electra Company and Southern California Edison. He holds a'Master Degree in Transportation Planning from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Tony Yankovich is a Senior Manager in Mercury Associates with more than 25 yearn of experience as a management analyst and consultant in the fleet management and public works areas. Mr. Yankovich specializes in serving state and local governments, universities and private companies in the provision of fleet management consulting services, management operations reviews, facilities space needs assessments, and development of facilities master plans. Prior to joining Mercury Associates, he was Senior Manager in the Fleet and Facilities Division of Eclipse, a division of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation, and Senior Consultant with Maximus, Inc. Before beginning his consulting career, he worked for the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas County, KS where he held several management positions in the Public Works, Operations Services, and County Clerk departments. Mr. Yankovich's particular areas of expertise include program evaluation; productivity and competitiveness assessments; fleet replacement planning and financing; maintenance facilities reviews and facilities space needs assessments. He holds a Bachelor's Degree in Sociology from the University of Kansas. Steve Saltzgiver is a Manager with Mercury Associates, Inc. Over his extensive career, he has a rather unique perspective having served at virtually every organizational level holding various roles ranging from maintenance technician to vice president In public, private and non-profit institutions while leading diverse fleets of over 40,000 assets, with annual operating budgets exceeding $I B dollars; leading process improvement teams and cost reduction initiatives; optimizing complex maintenance operations, and executing comprehensive talent management programs. He has taught workshops and best practice seminars on a wide array of topics throughout the US, Canada and Europe. Mr. Sattzgiver is recognized as a change advocate who has supervised the implementation of"several Fleet and ERP data systems, and as an executive for two Fortune 500 companies (i.e., Coca-Cola and Republic Services), two sizable state government fleet :operations (Utah and Georgia) and has been recognized for his achievements in data analysis, benchmarking for continuous improvement, fleet cost reduction, sustainable fleet technology, planning, telematics and deployment. Mr. Saltzgiver has led myriad multi-year strategic fleet management planning initiatives in both government and the private sector. He has also been active in several Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services professional fleet organizations serving in various leadership positions including: NAFA Curriculum and Governmental Affairs Chair, RMFMA Board Chair, National Conference of State Fleet Administrators (NCSFA) Executive Director and President and on various industry supplier boards. He was twice nominated for Automotive Fleet Magazine's, "Fleet Manager of the Year award and is the recipient of the 2000 Honda Environmental Leadership (State Government) award, 2005 NCSFA Distinguished Service Award and recipient of the 2015 Fleet Technology Expo Sustainable Fleet of the Year award. David Burtnick is a Senior Consultant with Mercury Associates. He has 17 years of experience in business management as well as 12 years of experience as an operations research statistician and data scientist. His experience includes predictive modeling, forecasting, business process improvement, lean Six Sigma methodology, simulation, and survival analysis. His fleet management consulting experience includes fleet replacement planning and alternative capital financing analysis, determination of optimal vehicle replacement cycles; and operating cost charge-back rate model development. Prior to joining Mercury Associates he worked as a research analyst at the Nielsen Company.He holds a Bachelor's Degree in Business from the University of Maryland at College Park. COST PROPOSAL Our proposed cost for each of the three components of the project is shown in the detailed cost proposal in the appendix. The amount shown for each component is a not- to-exceed price which includes all professional services and out-of-pocket expenses. However, the proposed cost for Component 2 is based on the assumption that it would be performed in conjunction with Component 1 (meaning either simultaneously or within one to two months of the performance of Component 1). This is because efficiencies in the conduct of Component 2, in terms of collecting and reviewing information, conducting interviews and site visits, etc., have been assumed in estimating its level of effort and cost. if the work of Component 2 were performed on a stand-alone basis, the cost would be approximately 40 percent more than the amount shown. Our proposed level of effort and fees are based on the thorough and detailed approach and work plan presented in this proposal. We recognize that this is not an insignificant amount of money for the Village to spend on a fleet management consulting project. We are confident, however, that the study will uncover savings opportunities that far exceed the cost of having Mercury conduct this project, and believe that many of our client references will readily attest to the fact that this has been their experience in working with our firm. That said, please be assured of our willingness to discuss modifications to our proposed approach to the project if the Village wishes to explore ways to reduce its overall cost or the cost of any particular components of the proposed work plan. RAIRINK11511*11 20 Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Consulting Services APPENDIX DETAILED COST PROPOSAL PROJECT TIMELINE AND MILESTONES xW4 Proposal to Provide _Fleet Management Consulting Services DETAILED COST PROPOSAL Dcscription • HOUrs Review Fleet Maintenance and Re.air Practices 1.1 Initiate and'manage the pmjecr 2 $ 480 8 $ 1,720 $ - $ - 10 $ 2,200 1.2 Cofict eand review information $ - 2 $ 430 4 $ 780 $ - 6 $ 1,210 1 1.3 Anafm data and benchmark conditions and perf6mance $ - $ - 8 $ 1,560 $ - 8 $ 11560 1.4 Evaluate business pradoes $ - 81 $ 1,720 32 $ 6,240 $ - 40 $ 7,960 1.5 Present findings and recommendations 8 $ 1,920 81 $ 1,720 16 $ 3,120 $ - 32 $ 6,760 Subtotal 10 $ 2.40 28 $ 590 60'$11,700 r S "'$191690 2 Review der Fleet Management Practices 121S 2,890 361 $ 7,740 49 $ 9,360 $ - 96 $19,980 Review Fleet Replacement Practices 3.1 Develop basebne fleet replacement plan, $ - $ $ - 24 $ 4,080 24 $ 4,060 3 3.2 Fine-tune replacemert plan $ - $ - $ - 4 $ 680 4 $ 690 3.3 Evaluate af6ernafive capital finarrjrg methods 4 $ 960 8 $ 1-,36-0-r 12 $ 2,320 3.4 Preser9findi and recommerdabons 8 $ 1,920 $ - $ - 24 $ 4,080 32 $ 6,000 Subtotal 12 $ 2 990 - $ - $ - $0 $10,200 72 $13,080 Grand Total 314 S ► 0. S21,060 f';O S 10,2010 264 S52,750 rttVe51 Component Task Description 2(3 ]1 �t 't3 ;� r 1t, 1? .. a [ . .. a :, • s v. ■■■�■■■■�■■■■■��■ ® • ' tl ' • • WON ■ow ONE NONE ® •i . • e • • M®®®®M®®MI.®®ME IMMI MEMO No MEMO . _ • ®�®®®��®tom ME i �J R y i R`53 v zW1a. a $ E E N f;f,"t E Amount: R f .. r per a oe 000 o $20,000 - $500,000 D Over $1,00c),000. • • 'r' I r d ' L� p, p ,9 E